CIGI Publishes Global Quantum Policy Brief by Mauritz Kop and Tracey Forrest

Waterloo, 5 February 2026—The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) has published a new policy brief, Global Quantum Governance: From Principles to Practice, authored by Mauritz Kop and Tracey Forrest. The brief is written for policy makers, regulators, standards bodies, and industry actors facing a practical transition: quantum technologies are moving from laboratory milestones toward deployment pathways where governance choices—especially around cybersecurity and cross-border infrastructure—become difficult to reverse.

Download the Policy Brief here: https://www.cigionline.org/documents/3746/PB_No.222_Kop_and_Forrest.pdf

Why this brief on quantum governance, and why now

The brief’s central timing claim is that near-term milestones—particularly post-quantum cryptography (PQC) migration and quantum networking—create a governance tipping point. After that point, certain security and societal harms may be costly (or impossible) to remediate. In the brief’s framing, PQC migration is not merely an engineering update; it is a “temporal rights and resilience” imperative because present-day decisions about crypto-agility, key life-cycle management, and data minimization determine whether sensitive data remains protected against future adversaries.

This urgency is paired with a structural diagnosis: national initiatives—including the EU’s proposed Quantum Act—are important, but insufficient on their own given quantum’s dual-use characteristics, global supply chains, and asymmetric capabilities across states and firms. The authors argue for a governance architecture that is “standards-first” and internationally coordinated, capable of sustaining what they call “security-sufficient openness,” and overseen by an International Quantum Agency.

The brief’s recommendations in practical terms

The brief concludes with a multi-pronged path “from principles to practice,” emphasizing four implementable priorities:

Strengthen foundations through standards and PQC execution: align cryptographic profiles across sectors; update procurement so crypto-agility, key life-cycle management, and “harvest now, decrypt later” mitigation become baseline requirements; and adopt “cryptographic resilience” via agile standards, testing, and incident playbooks.
Harmonize among allies: coordinate export controls, investment screening, and supply-chain security via mechanisms such as a proposed G7 Quantum Technology Point of Contact Group and narrowly scoped license-exception approaches in Five Eyes/AUKUS-style arrangements, while avoiding poorly designed measures that impose high compliance costs and chill benign collaboration.
Incentivize global collaboration and capacity building: federate national quantum clouds, SDG-oriented demonstrators, and regional test networks under common governance rules; and consider, longer-term, a “CERN for Quantum” that provides shared access anchored in transparency and equitable access, including for Global South partners.
Institutionalize foresight and bounded algorithmic regulation: resource international foresight capacities—within an IQA-type body or linked observatories—to update risk scenarios and stress-test legal frameworks, while experimenting with limited, well-governed AI-assisted monitoring and red-teaming to inform accountable human decision makers.

Takeaway for AIRecht’s readership

For legal and policy practitioners, the brief’s message is that quantum governance is entering a phase where operational artifacts—standards, benchmarks, procurement baselines, and interoperability profiles—will increasingly determine real-world rights, liabilities, and security outcomes. PQC migration and quantum networking are treated as the near-term proving ground for whether democracies can coordinate “security-sufficient openness” at scale.

For innovators and investors, the brief underscores that governance is not a brake on quantum progress but a design constraint that—if addressed early—can preserve global interoperability, reduce fragmentation, and support responsible diffusion of quantum capability without deepening geopolitical divides.

Meer lezen

Responsible Peer Review at Scholarly Journals: Guiding Manuscripts to Their Best Form

Behind every published paper stands an unnamed reader who helped make it publishable. That reader is a peer reviewer—unpaid, anonymous, and usually invisible. Mauritz Kop, Founder of the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology, has done that work across a strikingly broad set of fields, and this essay treats peer review as a craft worth describing: how to do it well, and where he does it.

Steward, not gatekeeper

Everything follows from how a reviewer understands the role. Read as a turnstile, review collapses into fault-finding; read as care for the scholarly record, it turns into the question of what a paper needs to reach its strongest form. Saying no remains part of the job when nothing can rescue a manuscript—but repair, not rejection, is the starting assumption. The method that supports this is unglamorous: read once generously to grasp intent, again critically to test claim against method and evidence, and a third time as the non-specialist who has to follow it. What the author then receives should be a guide, not a grade—precise, proportionate, and respectful of the labor behind the work.

What interdisciplinary review demands

The journals map the range of the practice—npj Digital Medicine, Ethics and Information Technology, Minds and Machines (Springer Nature), NanoEthics (Springer Nature), Intellectual Property Quarterly (Thomson Reuters), the Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice (Oxford University Press), and Quantum Science and Technology (IOP Publishing). Evidence means something different in each: a trial result, a philosophical argument, a reading of statute, and a physics experiment are not validated the same way, so the reviewer adapts to the discipline at hand. Physics makes the point sharp. A quantum protocol that assumes an unknown state can be copied violates the no-cloning theorem; a scheme that ignores decoherence, or forgets that measurement perturbs the very state it reads, has not survived contact with the physics—a rigor that also animates Kop's Quantum-ELSPI work on the legal and ethical implications of quantum technology.

Confidentiality and recognition

You will find no war stories here about particular submissions, and the silence is deliberate. Confidentiality is not an accessory to peer review but its precondition: only because reviewers say nothing can authors hand unfinished work to a stranger. Such discretion makes the labor hard to see, and harder to honor. The exception came in 2022, when IOP Publishing granted Kop its Trusted Reviewer Certification, a competency-based recognition of reviewers who demonstrate a high standard of review—a mark of rigor and usefulness rather than sheer output. Practiced this way, peer review is less a barrier than the quiet mechanism that keeps the scholarly record trustworthy.

Meer lezen

Academics, Research, ScholarshipMauritz Kop25 december 2025Mauritz Kop, Stanford RQT, Ethics, Standards, Peer Review, Scholarly Publishing, Research Integrity, IOP Trusted Reviewer, Quantum Science and Technology, Interdisciplinary Research

GARP Interviews Mauritz Kop on Quantum Governance Strategies for Risk Professionals

The Global Association of Risk Professionals (GARP) interviewed Mauritz Kop for David Weldon's article Full-Scale Quantum Computing May Be Years Away. Risk Mitigation Can't Wait.—bringing quantum governance to the desks of risk professionals worldwide.

Q-Day is the wrong question

Kop's message to the risk profession inverts the usual timeline anxiety. The immediate danger is not a cinematic moment when encryption falls; it is the quiet accumulation of harvested data—financial records, identity data, health and government archives—collected today for decryption tomorrow, compounded by weak vendor oversight and a lack of crypto-agility. Records that outlive their cryptography may already face that exposure, whatever the hardware roadmaps say.

Five must-haves for a quantum governance strategy

The strategy Kop laid out is deliberately operational: a PQC migration roadmap anchored in asset classification and harvest-now-decrypt-later exposure; board-level ownership; integration with existing cyber, model, and operational risk frameworks; vendor due diligence on quantum-safety claims; and independent testing and benchmarking instead of marketing trust. Layered across architecture, algorithms, and operations, it treats quantum as an extension of disciplines risk professionals already command—the same principles-to-practice arc as the global quantum policy brief he co-authored at CIGI.

From the trading floor to the boardroom

Quantum, Kop argues, is both threat and tool for finance: it endangers the confidentiality of everything archived, and it is being explored for better simulation, optimization, and risk discovery. His benchmark for the U.S.: core post-quantum migration substantially done before 2030 for long-lived data and critical systems. The institutions that will meet that deadline are the ones whose boards treat quantum readiness as governance, not as someone else's research project.

Meer lezen

Quantum Technology, Governance, CybersecurityMauritz Kop19 december 2025Mauritz Kop, Quantum Governance, Policy, Standards, Post-Quantum Cryptography, GARP, Risk Management, Financial Services, Crypto-Agility, Quantum Technology Impact Assessment

AI Regulation in California: The Daiki SB-53 Recipe for the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act

California's Senate Bill 53—the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act—is the first U.S. law aimed squarely at frontier AI models through a compute threshold. Daiki, the AI and quantum governance company co-founded by Mauritz Kop, has published a practical recipe for complying with it, and for turning compliance into governance capital.

From voluntary principles to enforceable rules

SB-53 marks the moment U.S. artificial intelligence regulation acquired teeth: a compute threshold of 10²⁶ floating-point operations, a "large frontier developer" category above USD 500 million in revenue, published Frontier AI Frameworks, transparency reports on deployment, critical-incident reporting on a fifteen-day (sometimes twenty-four-hour) clock, whistleblower protections, and Attorney General penalties of up to USD 1 million per violation. Most obligations apply from January 1, 2026—which makes readiness a present-tense question, not a planning horizon. Kop has engaged U.S. lawmakers on these trajectories, including consulting Senator Mark Warner on AI and quantum technology policy.

Six steps to SB-53 readiness

The Daiki recipe walks an organization from applicability analysis (model inventory, compute estimation, revenue exposure) through a standards-based governance baseline on ISO/IEC 42001 and the NIST AI RMF, the design of an operational Frontier AI Framework, repeatable transparency-report workflows, incident and whistleblower pipelines, and finally harmonization with the EU AI Act and other regimes—one governance system, not a stack of statute-shaped silos.

Why boards should care

The deeper argument is strategic: a frontier-AI law built on evidence-generating transparency rewards organizations that can prove their safety practices. Boards that treat SB-53 as an opportunity to institutionalize frontier-grade discipline—rather than as an isolated burden—convert a regulatory deadline into trust, resilience, and license to operate.

Meer lezen

Artificial Intelligence, American Law, GovernanceMauritz Kop1 december 2025Mauritz Kop, AI, Regulation, Policy, Daiki, California SB-53, TFAIA, Frontier AI, AI Safety, ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF

Mauritz Kop Speaks at Oxford University on Quantum Threats

Oxford University, 10 November 2025—This afternoon, Professor Mauritz Kop joined distinguished colleagues at the University of Oxford for a high-level panel discussion titled “Quantum Supremacy: Technology, Strategy, and International Order.” Hosted by the Department of Politics and International Relations (DPIR) and the Oxford Emerging Threats & Technology Working Group (ETG), the event convened a diverse audience of scholars, policymakers, and industry leaders to dissect the rapidly evolving landscape of quantum technologies.

Moderated by Sarah Chen, the session moved beyond the hyperbolic headlines often associated with quantum computing to address the granular realities of strategy, governance, and international security. Alongside Kop, the panel featured Dr. Simson Garfinkel of BasisTech, Angus Lockhart of SECQAI, and Professor Michael Holynski of the UK Quantum Technology Research Hub. The resulting dialogue offered a dense, forward-looking examination of quantum threats and opportunities—ranging from the precision of quantum sensing and the urgency of post-quantum cryptography (PQC) to the geopolitical friction points of supply-chain resilience and the risk of sub-optimal governance lock-in.

The Mission of Oxford’s Emerging Threats & Technology Working Group

The context for this discussion was set by the unique mandate of the host organization. The Emerging Threats & Technology Working Group at Oxford University stands as one of the few academic platforms systematically examining how critical and emerging technologies (CETs) reshape the security environment. Meeting regularly to assess the national-security implications of technologies such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, directed energy, and space systems, the Group brings together participants from academia, industry, and government in a hybrid format.

This institutional design is consequential. By convening interdisciplinary seminars and publishing detailed session reports, Oxford Emerging Threats builds a community capable of treating quantum technology not merely as a laboratory curiosity or a narrow industrial race, but as a systems problem. Within this forum, quantum is framed as a variable that touches deterrence, alliance cohesion, human rights, and the resilience of critical infrastructures. For Stanford RQT (Responsible Quantum Technology), represented by Kop, this mandate aligns closely with the necessity to develop governance, standards, and strategic frameworks that keep quantum innovation compatible with an open, rules-based international order.

Reframing the Narrative: From Quantum Supremacy to Allied Quantum Assurance

In his opening remarks, Kop challenged the utility of the term “quantum supremacy” when applied to state actors. While the term has technical validity in describing a computational threshold, legally and strategically it acts as a misleading metaphor. Kop argued that for democratic states, the more relevant concept is assurance: the ability of allies to deploy quantum-era capabilities in a way that is verifiable, interoperable, and resilient, while simultaneously preserving an open international order.

To operationalize this, Kop proposed the framework of Allied Quantum Assurance, a strategy built upon recognizing that the world is currently crossing a “quantum event horizon.” Much like an astrophysical event horizon represents a point of no return, the current governance tipping point implies that early decisions on standards, export controls, supply chains, and research security will lock allies into long-lasting path dependencies.

The immediate driver of this urgency is the “harvest-now, decrypt-later” (HNDL) risk—a metaphorical “Q-Day” scenario where data exfiltrated today is decrypted by a future, Shor-capable quantum computer. This reality reframes strategic stability: whereas classical nuclear deterrence rests on mutually assured destruction, quantum security centers on deterrence-by-denial, achieved through informational assurance and operational resilience.

Meer lezen

War on the Rocks Publishes "A Bletchley Park for the Quantum Age"

Washington DC, Nov. 6, 2025—War on the Rocks has published a major new commentary by Stanford RQT’s Mauritz Kop, titled “A Bletchley Park for the Quantum Age.” The article translates his broader research on quantum governance into a concrete, operational blueprint for post-quantum cryptography (PQC) migration across the United States and its allies.

Appearing in a venue read closely by practitioners in defence, intelligence, and foreign policy, the piece draws a deliberate conceptual line from the World War II codebreaking effort at Bletchley Park to today’s challenge of securing democratic communications. It argues that Bletchley Park was more than a geographic location; it was a method—an integrated system of science, engineering, operations, and alliance management. Kop contends that a similar methodology is required now to protect national security systems against cryptanalytically relevant quantum computers.

The Enigma Machine utilized a complex series of electromechanical rotors to produce a polyalphabetic substitution cipher, creating an encryption standard that was widely deemed unbreakable by contemporary adversaries. Defeating this system required the Allies to operationalize abstract mathematics into industrial capability, a feat that fundamentally altered the trajectory of the war.

The article situates PQC migration not as a narrow information technology upgrade, but as a core tenet of United States and allied quantum-AI grand strategy. It highlights how flagship programmes such as the United States Department of Defense’s Replicator initiative must be made “quantum-ready” to avoid becoming silently obsolete once large-scale quantum computers arrive.

Professor Kop extends his gratitude to War on the Rocks editor Lieutenant Colonel Walter ‘Rick’ Landgraf, PhD, whose precise editorial work helped sharpen the argument and tailor it to the publication’s strategic readership.

The Core Argument: A Bletchley Method for Post-Quantum Cryptography Migration

The essay begins from a straightforward technical premise. Once fault-tolerant quantum computers exist, Shor’s algorithm will efficiently factor large integers and compute discrete logarithms, thereby breaking the public-key cryptosystems—such as RSA and elliptic-curve cryptography—on which secure communication currently relies. In parallel, Grover’s algorithm will provide a quadratic speed-up in brute-force search, effectively halving the security margin of many symmetric-key schemes.

In this setting, the world’s cryptographic infrastructure cannot simply be patched at the margins. It requires a comprehensive, carefully managed transition to new, quantum-resistant algorithms.

Kop proposes that the United States and its allies apply a “Bletchley method” to this problem by tightly linking:

Domestic execution of PQC migration, and
An allied, standards-based certification compact that prevents fragmentation.

Defensively, this means post-quantum cryptography by default and certified interoperability across critical systems. Politically, it means that Washington earns the right to lead abroad by delivering verifiable results at home.

The framework is organised around two distinct but mutually reinforcing tracks:

Track One – “Ultra at Home”: rigorous domestic execution, and
Track Two – “Allied Codebook Abroad”: international architecture designed to avoid a “quantum splinternet.”

Meer lezen

Mauritz Kop Speaker at United Nations International Year of Quantum Science and Technology 2025

On 31 October 2025, Mauritz Kop, Founder of Stanford RQT (Responsible Quantum Technology), served as one of the main speakers at the North America regional workshop on the Ethical, Legal, and Social Aspects (ELSA) of Broadening Global Ownership of Quantum Technologies. The online workshop was part of the United Nations International Year of Quantum Science and Technology 2025 (IYQ 2025), a year-long initiative mandated by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) and led by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to mark 100 years of quantum mechanics and to address the emerging “quantum divide” in access, skills, and infrastructure.

The North America edition was convened by Dr. Zeki C. Seskir and Professor Shohini Ghose as part of a six-region ELSA-of-quantum workshop series. Each regional workshop is feeding into a global IYQ event on the Ethical, Legal, and Social Aspects of Broadening Global Ownership of Quantum Technologies to be held in Istanbul in November 2025.

The program brought together four principal speakers—Mauritz Kop, Bruna Shinohara de Mendonça, Lindsay Rand, and Isabelle Lacroix—and designated commentators Rodrigo Araiza Bravo and Karl Thibault. The workshop closed with an open discussion in which participants reflected on regional needs, expected impact, and the kind of alignment that is necessary for a fair and secure quantum future.

The International Year of Quantum and the North America ELSA Workshop

The International Year of Quantum Science and Technology 2025 was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in June 2024. The resolution calls on states and international organizations to use 2025 to raise public awareness of quantum science, promote education and capacity-building—especially in the Global South—and strengthen cooperation so that all countries can participate in and benefit from quantum technologies.

Within this broader mandate, the ELSA of Broadening Global Ownership of Quantum Technologies initiative focuses on quantum governance. The North America workshop was explicitly framed around three questions:

Which ethical, legal, and social aspects of quantum technologies are most urgent for North America today?
Which ELSA topics are most important globally?
How should the future of ELSA and related policy implications be shaped in Europe, North America, and worldwide, and what forms of alignment are needed?

The three-hour program opened with an overview of the IYQ ELSA event series, followed by the four invited talks, a short break, and then a structured discussion and closing reflections.

From ELSA to ELSPI: A Metaparadigm for Quantum Governance

Kop’s keynote, “From ELSA to ELSPI: A Metaparadigm for Quantum Governance,” drew on his recent work on Quantum-ELSPI and Responsible Quantum Technology, including Quantum-ELSPI: A Novel Field of Research; Ten Principles for Responsible Quantum Innovation (co-authored with, among others, Raymond Laflamme); and his legislative blueprint Towards a European Quantum Act.

He began by defining Quantum-ELSPI (co-developed with Luciano Floridi then at Oxford, now at Yale) as the study of Ethical, Legal, Socio-economic, and Policy Implications of quantum technologies. Classical ELSA—Ethical, Legal, and Social Aspects—was designed for more conventional technologies and, in his view, is too narrow for quantum systems that combine:

Dual-use components that can be deployed for both civilian and military purposes;
Long security horizons, where sensitive data captured today may be decrypted decades later by cryptanalytically relevant quantum computers; and
Fragile supply chains, in which a handful of materials, cryogenic systems, or photonic components create systemic bottlenecks.

To address this, Kop articulated three foundational pillars of the Quantum-ELSPI metaparadigm, developed in a recent Science article with co-authors Mateo Aboy, Urs Gasser, Glenn Cohen, and others:

Standards-First Governance
Technical and assurance standards—such as post-quantum cryptography (PQC) profiles, quantum quality-management systems, and certification schemes—are treated as the primary vehicle for embedding values into systems. Law, policy, and institutional design are built around these standards rather than attempting to regulate hypothetical risks in the abstract.
Execution-Oriented Ethics
Ethics is framed as a delivery problem. Instead of high-level value statements, Kop emphasized auditable supply chains, post-quantum cryptography migration drills, and verifiable deployment metrics in sectors such as finance, health care, and government archives. Ethics, in this sense, is measured by what actually ships and how it behaves under stress.
Planetary Welfare
The third pillar reframes quantum technologies not only as instruments of national competitiveness or military advantage, but as ecological and health technologies. Quantum-ELSPI is thus aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), emphasizing applications in climate modeling, clean-energy materials discovery, quantum-enabled medical technologies, and resilient humanitarian communications.

Taken together, these pillars elevate Quantum-ELSPI from a narrow ethics add-on to a metaparadigm for governing the entire quantum stack—from materials and cryogenic infrastructure to cloud-based access, algorithms, and hybrid quantum–classical systems.

Meer lezen

Governance, Quantum ELSPI, Stanford RQTMauritz Kop31 oktober 2025United Nations, Quantum-ELSPI, Ethics, Law, Policy, Governance, UNESCO, OECD, IYQ 2025, Geopolitics, Societal Impact, Innovation, Science, Mauritz Kop, Stanford RQT

Mauritz Kop Advises Stanford FSI Students on Quantum Policy and Cybersecurity Project

Mauritz Kop advised a Stanford student research team on their quantum policy and cybersecurity project—part of Technology, Innovation, and Great Power Competition, the policy-entrepreneurship course at the Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation, Freeman Spogli Institute (FSI).

Startup methods, statecraft problems

In Steve Blank's experiential course, student teams take real-world challenges from U.S. and partner-nation policymakers and work them like founders: rapid discovery, agile iteration, actionable insights for real decision-makers. One team—led by Hannah Nabavi, a graduate student in Aeronautics and Astronautics and Threshold Venture Fellow—chose the quantum frontier: quantum computing and post-quantum cybersecurity as a great-power-competition problem.

From Q-Day to the three pillars

Kop's advisory session gave the team its working map: the Q-Day threat and why harvest-now, decrypt-later collection makes it urgent today; post-quantum cryptography mitigation in finance; the three quantum pillars of computing, sensing, and networking; and the investment ecosystem—startups, ventures, and the discipline that separates substance from hype. It is the same teaching thread he brings to quantum computing and law students at Fordham.

The next quantum policy generation

When aerospace engineers choose post-quantum security as their policy challenge, the signal—in Kop's reading—is clear: quantum literacy is becoming core strategic literacy. The team set out to share its final paper at the end of the fall 2025 quarter—exactly the kind of student work the quantum governance field needs more of.

Meer lezen

Quantum Technology, Teaching, UniversityMauritz Kop27 oktober 2025Mauritz Kop, Stanford University, Quantum Governance, Post-Quantum Cryptography, Stanford RQT, Freeman Spogli Institute, Gordian Knot Center, Great Power Competition, Steve Blank, Stanford Students

Mauritz Kop Teaches Quantum Governance at the United States Air Force Academy

Mauritz Kop, Founder of the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology, returned to the United States Air Force Academy—where he serves as guest professor—to teach cadets a class titled Responsible Quantum Technology: Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework. The session began with the physics and moved to the geostrategic, legal, and ethical architecture the field will need as it matures, addressing two questions the cadets had prepared: why govern quantum before it is mature, and what framework best balances innovation against risk.

From the mechanics to the law

The lecture grounded its policy argument in the physics of the second quantum revolution. Where classical systems encode definite bits, quantum systems exploit superposition, entanglement, and tunneling to unlock new categories of capability across computing, sensing, simulation, and networking—from drug discovery and novel materials to jam-resistant navigation and physically grounded secure communications. The same properties that make the technology powerful, Kop argued, strain a legal order built on certainty, locality, and linear causality, which is why quantum governance calls for a tailored, sui generis approach rather than a retrofit of existing rules. The themes extend the line of work Kop set out in Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Technology.

Why govern before maturity

On the cadets' first question, Kop drew on the Collingridge dilemma—control is easiest early, when knowledge is limited but options remain open—and on his metaphor of a quantum event horizon, a threshold beyond which technological lock-in makes the path far harder to redirect. Acting while the technology is still malleable, he argued, is not a brake on innovation but a precondition for steering it toward democratic values, public trust, and the legal certainty that long-horizon research and investment depend on.

A two-pillar framework

To the second question, Kop offered an integrated two-pillar response: agile, risk-based regulation that tiers obligations by an application's risk, paired with a strategic industrial and security policy that builds national capacity—funding across the lab-to-market pipeline, supply-chain resilience for critical minerals and components, talent development, and shared research infrastructure. This is the operational form of the Responsible Quantum Technology framework, organized under the SEA principles of safeguarding, engaging, and advancing the technology, and aimed at steering innovation rather than slowing it.

Dual-use and deterrence

For future Air Force and Space Force officers, the dual-use character of quantum technology was the connecting thread. The most acute near-term concern is the cryptographic threat—"Q-Day" and "Harvest Now, Decrypt Later"—which makes the migration to post-quantum cryptography a present-tense security task. Set against great-power competition, Kop's prescription is deliberate stewardship: embedding democratic values into standards early, protecting research from state-sponsored theft, and cooperating with allies, themes he has also brought to venues including the Hoover Institution. The class closed on the conviction that technology's trajectory is a matter of choice, and that engaging its technical, strategic, legal, and ethical dimensions is a core professional responsibility for the officers who will shape these systems.

Meer lezen

Teaching, Quantum Technology, GovernanceMauritz Kop23 oktober 2025Mauritz Kop, Quantum Governance, Stanford RQT, National Security, Governance, Policy, Quantum-ELSPI, Standards, US Air Force Academy, Teaching, Dual-Use, Post-Quantum Cryptography

Columbia Law Publishes 'Towards a European Quantum Act' Study by Mauritz Kop

In a landmark academic contribution, Columbia Law School’s prestigious Columbia Journal of European Law (CJEL) is publishing a comprehensive study by Mauritz Kop, a leading scholar in the field of quantum technology governance. Titled "Towards a European Quantum Act: A Two-Pillar Framework for Regulation and Innovation," the paper, published in Volume 31, Issue 1 (Fall 2025), presents a forward-looking and robust framework for the European Union to navigate the complexities of the quantum age. This timely publication in a top ranked journal guided by the intellectual stewardship of renowned Columbia Law professors Anu Bradford and George Bermann, is set to significantly influence the burgeoning transatlantic dialogue on the future of quantum technology.

The full citation for the paper is: Mauritz Kop – Towards a European Quantum Act: A Two-Pillar Framework for Regulation and Innovation (Sept 9, 2025), Volume 31, Issue No. 1, Columbia Journal of European Law, Columbia Law School (2025), final edition forthcoming. Pre-print versions are available on SSRN, arXiv, ResearchGate, the Website of the European Commission, and AIRecht.

The Columbia Journal of European Law: A Bastion of Transatlantic Legal Scholarship

Founded in 1994, the Columbia Journal of European Law has established itself as a leading academic publication dedicated to the study of European law from a transatlantic perspective. Its mission is to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas between scholars, practitioners, and policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic. The journal’s history is deeply intertwined with the development of the European Union and the evolving relationship between the EU and the United States. It has consistently published groundbreaking scholarship on a wide range of topics, from competition law and trade to human rights and constitutional law.

The journal's ranking among the top international and European law journals is a testament to its quality and influence. CJEL is currently the single most cited European law journal in the world. It is widely recognized for its rigorous academic standards and its commitment to publishing innovative and policy-relevant research. The journal’s association with Columbia Law School, one of the world’s leading law schools, further enhances its prestige. Columbia Law, located on Amsterdam Avenue in Morningside Heights, Manhattan, New York City, is an Ivy League institution consistantly ranked 3rd in the country - its name carries weight. You can find more information about the journal on its official website: https://cjel.law.columbia.edu/ and its Scholastica page: https://columbia-journal-of-european-law.scholasticahq.com/. For more on the journal's history, the Wikipedia page is a useful resource, and updates can be found on their LinkedIn profile.

CJEL Guided by Star Professors Anu Bradford and George Bermann

The intellectual rigor and policy relevance of Kop's study are a reflection of the Journal’s guidance and mentorship of two of Columbia Law School's most distinguished scholars: Anu Bradford and George Bermann.

Professor Bradford, the Henry L. Moses Professor of Law and International Organization, is a world-renowned expert on the "Brussels Effect," a term she coined to describe the European Union's unilateral power to regulate global markets. Her work has profoundly shaped our understanding of the EU's role in the world and its ability to set global standards for technology and other industries. Her insights into the EU’s regulatory power are clearly reflected in Kop’s proposal for a European Quantum Act.

Professor George Bermann is the Walter Gellhorn Professor of Law and the Jean Monnet Professor of European Union Law at Columbia Law School. A leading authority on European law, international arbitration, and comparative law, Professor Bermann has been instrumental in shaping the field of European law studies in the United States. His deep understanding of the intricacies of EU law and governance provides a solid foundation for Kop’s ambitious legislative proposal. The combined expertise of these two scholars has undoubtedly enriched the paper, ensuring its legal and political feasibility.

"Towards a European Quantum Act": A Two-Pillar Framework

Kop's paper argues that the European Union has a unique opportunity to shape the global governance of quantum technologies. He proposes a comprehensive "European Quantum Act" based on a two-pillar framework:

Pillar 1: Agile, NLF-Style Regulation: This pillar focuses on creating a flexible and adaptive regulatory framework, similar to the EU’s New Legislative Framework (NLF) for products. It would establish a risk-based approach to regulating quantum technologies, with stricter rules for high-risk applications and more flexibility for low-risk ones. This approach, Kop argues, would allow for innovation to flourish while ensuring that fundamental rights and safety are protected. A key element of this pillar is the "standards-first" philosophy, which prioritizes the development of technical standards as a primary mechanism for embedding democratic values into the very architecture of quantum technologies.

Pillar 2: Ambitious, Chips Act-Style Industrial Policy: This pillar calls for a proactive and ambitious industrial policy to support the development of a competitive and resilient European quantum ecosystem. Drawing inspiration from the U.S. and EU Chips Acts, Kop proposes a range of measures, including funding for research and development, support for startups and SMEs, and the creation of a European quantum infrastructure. This pillar aims to ensure that Europe can compete with the United States and China in the global quantum race.

A Standards-First Approach to Secure a Democratic Future

A central tenet of Kop's proposal is the "standards-first" approach. He argues that technical standards are not merely technical tools but are "vessels for values." By proactively shaping the standards for quantum technologies, the EU can embed its democratic values, such as privacy, fairness, and accountability, into the core of the technology. This approach would not only ensure that quantum technologies are developed and used in a responsible manner but would also give the EU a competitive advantage in the global market for trustworthy quantum systems.

This concept builds upon a recent study published in the prestigious journal Science, senior-authored by Kop. The study, titled "Quantum technology governance: A standards-first approach," was first-authored by Mateo Aboy of Cambridge University, with co-authorship from Urs Gasser, a leading scholar at the Technical University of Munich and Harvard University, and I. Glenn Cohen, Vice Dean of Harvard Law School and Faculty Director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics. This foundational work, which can be accessed here at Science, provides the rigorous academic underpinnings for leveraging standards as a primary tool for responsible technology governance.

The paper, initiated by the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology, suggests the creation of a Quantum Technology Quality Management System (QT-QMS), which would be developed in partnership with international bodies like ISO/IEC and IEEE. This system would provide a certifiable CE mark for quantum systems, signaling their compliance with EU standards and values.

Meer lezen

Mauritz Kop Awarded Senior Fellowship at Leading G7 Think Tank CIGI Waterloo

Mauritz Kop, founder of the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology (RQT) and a guest professor at the US Air Force Academy (USAFA), has been appointed a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), a leading Canadian G7 think tank with a global reputation for impactful research and policy advice. This fellowship marks a significant new chapter in Professor Kop's work, allowing for a deeper dive into the intricate and rapidly evolving nexus of quantum technology, artificial intelligence (AI), intellectual property (IP) law, competition policy, and national security. The initial project will focus on developing a comprehensive roadmap for navigating this complex landscape, building on previous engagement with CIGI and long-standing academic and professional connections with Canada.

Mauritz Kop Appointed Senior Fellow at CIGI: A New Chapter in Quantum Governance and Global Security

This CIGI senior fellow appointment is not just a personal honour, but a testament to the growing global recognition of the urgent need for innovative governance models to steer the development of powerful dual-use technologies towards beneficial outcomes for humanity. The challenges are immense, but so are the opportunities. In a world grappling with geopolitical instability and the disruptive potential of emerging technologies, CIGI’s mission to build bridges from knowledge to power has never been more critical. Kop is thrilled to contribute to this mission and to collaborate with CIGI’s distinguished team of experts.

Building on a Foundation: The Dual-Use Project and Previous Engagements

Professor Kop's journey with CIGI began prior to this fellowship, with a seminar delivered on the governance of dual-use quantum technologies. That lecture, titled “Responsible Quantum AI Governance: From Ethical Principles to Global Frameworks,” set the stage for the work he is about to undertake. In that presentation, he argued that we are approaching a “Quantum Event Horizon”—a critical juncture beyond which our ability to shape the trajectory of advanced quantum and AI systems may be irrevocably lost. The core of Kop's argument was that traditional governance models and diplomatic efforts are insufficient to address the systemic challenges posed by a global, high-stakes race for quantum supremacy.

The seminar explored the necessity of a multi-layered governance strategy. This includes not only the development of robust international legal frameworks and oversight bodies, drawing inspiration from nuclear non-proliferation treaties, but also the integration of “Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI” to hardwire universal values into the technology itself. This dual approach, grounded in the principles of responsible innovation, is essential to mitigate the risks of misuse by state and non-state actors, and to ensure that these technologies serve to enhance, rather than undermine, democratic societies.

The positive reception to these ideas and the stimulating discussions that followed with the CIGI community laid the groundwork for this senior fellowship. It became clear that there was a shared understanding of the stakes involved and a common commitment to forging a path towards a safe and equitable quantum future. This fellowship provides the ideal platform to transition from articulating these principles to developing concrete, actionable policy recommendations.

A New Frontier: IP, Competition Law, Quantum, Dual-Use, and National Security

Professor Kop's first project as a CIGI Senior Fellow will be an in-depth analysis of the critical nexus between quantum technology, AI, IP policy, and national security strategy. The convergence of quantum and AI capabilities presents unprecedented challenges for global innovation and strategic stability, most notably the looming threat of “Q-Day,” when a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could break most of the public-key cryptography that underpins our digital world.

This project will draw lessons from historical precedents, particularly the governance of nuclear technology, to inform the development of novel frameworks for quantum governance. A key component of the research will be a comparative analysis of quantum IP strategies across the dominant tech blocs, examining how different approaches to patents, trade secrets, and state secrets are shaping the global quantum race.

Meer lezen

Quantum Technology Governance: The Daiki Quantum Governance Recipe and the World's First QT-QMS

Quantum technology arrives with a governance problem unlike the one that classical computing posed. The systems are powerful, dual-use, and—at the hardware level—physically fragile in ways that ordinary quality regimes never had to model. Daiki, the AI and quantum governance company co-founded by Mauritz Kop, has published the Daiki Quantum Governance Recipe to close that gap: a toolkit that turns responsible-innovation principles into an auditable management system, anchored by what Daiki calls the world's first Quantum Technology Quality Management System (QT-QMS).

A management system for a fragile technology

The QT-QMS is a coined framework, extending to quantum the system-level discipline that ISO 13485 brought to medical devices and ISO/IEC 27001 to information security. The case for a dedicated discipline is physical as much as legal: quantum information lives in fragile superposition states that decoherence degrades on short timescales, and measurement is irreversible, so fidelity, error rates, and calibration drift become first-order operational facts. A quality system built for classical software simply does not have vocabulary for these failure modes, which is why Daiki argues quantum needs a management standard of its own.

Three ingredients, one auditable trail

The Recipe is built around three pillars. A QMS Backbone supplies the ISO-aligned, auditable framework for quality and risk management, integrating ISO/IEC 27001, 27005, and 42001 alongside the proposed QT-QMS. An Ethical Compass operationalizes the Ten Principles for Responsible Quantum Innovation—grouped as Safeguarding, Engaging, and Advancing—through checklists, templates, and guided assessments. An Assessment Engine automates Quantum Impact Assessments across the lifecycle, logging every decision into a time-stamped audit trail that spans ex-ante, ex-durante, and ex-post review. Daiki frames the synthesis of the three as a path to Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI: systems hardened against quantum attack and bound to an enforceable set of values.

Standards first, regulation later

The Recipe rests on a standards-first philosophy—voluntary, consensus-driven standards as the most workable foundation for a fast-moving field—and situates that approach inside a four-stage cycle running from principles through soft law to hard law. That sequencing matters for timing: by building governance on standards already taking shape through ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 3, IEEE, and NIST's post-quantum cryptography work, organizations turn today's best practices into tomorrow's compliance evidence as binding frameworks such as a future EU Quantum Act emerge. Daiki points toward system-level certification of a company's QT-QMS by an accredited body, on the medtech model, as the longer-term destination.

Why it matters now

The deeper argument is one of timing and proof. Quantum governance, like AI governance before it, is moving from voluntary commitment to a documented, auditable function—and the organizations best placed for that shift are the ones building a single coherent management system now, rather than assembling a reactive checklist once enforcement arrives. For a quantum ecosystem dominated by startups and research labs, the Recipe's promise is to lower the cost of doing this well, so that responsibility and speed stop being a trade-off.

Meer lezen

Quantum Technology, Governance, CertificationMauritz Kop8 augustus 2025Mauritz Kop, Quantum Governance, Standards, Governance, Stanford RQT, Ethics, Daiki, QT-QMS, Responsible Quantum Technology, ISO/IEC 42001, Quantum Impact Assessment, Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI, EU Quantum Act

Blog over Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum, Deep Learning, Blockchain en Big Data Law

Why this brief on quantum governance, and why now

The brief’s recommendations in practical terms

Takeaway for AIRecht’s readership

Steward, not gatekeeper

What interdisciplinary review demands

Confidentiality and recognition

Q-Day is the wrong question

Five must-haves for a quantum governance strategy

From the trading floor to the boardroom

From voluntary principles to enforceable rules

Six steps to SB-53 readiness

Why boards should care

The Mission of Oxford’s Emerging Threats & Technology Working Group

Reframing the Narrative: From Quantum Supremacy to Allied Quantum Assurance

The Core Argument: A Bletchley Method for Post-Quantum Cryptography Migration

The International Year of Quantum and the North America ELSA Workshop

From ELSA to ELSPI: A Metaparadigm for Quantum Governance

Startup methods, statecraft problems

From Q-Day to the three pillars

The next quantum policy generation

From the mechanics to the law

Why govern before maturity

A two-pillar framework

Dual-use and deterrence

The Columbia Journal of European Law: A Bastion of Transatlantic Legal Scholarship

CJEL Guided by Star Professors Anu Bradford and George Bermann

"Towards a European Quantum Act": A Two-Pillar Framework

A Standards-First Approach to Secure a Democratic Future

Mauritz Kop Appointed Senior Fellow at CIGI: A New Chapter in Quantum Governance and Global Security

Building on a Foundation: The Dual-Use Project and Previous Engagements

A New Frontier: IP, Competition Law, Quantum, Dual-Use, and National Security

A management system for a fragile technology

Three ingredients, one auditable trail

Standards first, regulation later

Why it matters now

Juridische diensten en projecten in Nederland en daarbuiten